Chaudhary, R (on the application of) v Bristol Crown Court & Anor

Chaudhary, R (on the application of) v Bristol Crown Court & Anor

Rule 12 of the Crown Court Rules 1982 no longer applies to criminal matters following the introduction of the Criminal Procedure Rules, and the Crown Court lacks inherent jurisdiction to award costs in section 59 applications; therefore, the order for costs was wrong and must be quashed.

Parties
Claimant: Mohammad Mumtaz Chaudhary; 1st Defendant: Bristol Crown Court; 2nd Defendant: HMRC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Costs Determination Following Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Order as to costs quashed
Legal Topics
Costs in Criminal Proceedings, Jurisdiction of Crown Court, Interpretation of Procedural Rules

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammad Mumtaz Chaudhary

Claimant

Bristol Crown Court

1st Defendant

HMRC

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Costs Determination Following Substantive Judgment

  1. 1 Whether Rule 12 of the Crown Court Rules 1982 remains in force for awarding costs in criminal matters after the introduction of the Criminal Procedure Rules
  2. 2 Whether the Crown Court has inherent jurisdiction to award costs in applications under section 59 Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001

Ratio Decidendi

Rule 12 of the Crown Court Rules 1982 no longer applies to criminal matters following the introduction of the Criminal Procedure Rules, and the Crown Court lacks inherent jurisdiction to award costs in section 59 applications; therefore, the order for costs was wrong and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Order as to costs quashed

Orders

  • The order as to costs is quashed.